Jump to content

Shirtless Crackhead

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Shirtless Crackhead

  • Birthday 09/11/2001

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Helicopter Pad
  • Interests
    Physical Removal

Network IDs

  • PSN ID
  • Battle.Net ID
  • Steam ID

Recent Profile Visitors

11,142 profile views

Shirtless Crackhead's Achievements

ACU Addict

ACU Addict (11/11)

  1. 2015 the U.S. is, according to the Census https://factfinder.c....xhtml?src=bkmk 62.3% White 17.1% Hispanic 12.6% Black 2016 the FBI: UCR reports https://ucr.fbi.gov/...tables/table-21 However, comma space the UCR doesn't separate Whites and Hispanics, so for purposes of the UCR the US is 79.4% White and 12.6% Black. Murder White - 44.7% Black - 52.6% Rape White - 67.6% Black - 29.1% Robbery White - 43.4% Black - 54.5% Aggravated Assault White - 62.8% Black - 33.3% Burglary White - 68.4% Black - 29.1% Larceny White - 69% Black - 27.7% Motor Vehicle Theft White - 66% Black - 30.7% Arson White - 72% Black - 23.3% Other Assaults White - 65.2% Black - 31.4% Forgery and Counterfeiting White - 65.5% Black - 31.9% Fraud White - 67% Black - 30.5% Embezzlement White - 61.4% Black - 35.8% Stolen Property White - 64.2% Black - 33.4% Vandalism White - 68.4% Black - 28.1% Weapons White - 55.9% Black - 41.8% Prostitution White - 55.5% Black - 37.9% Sex Offenses (except rape and prostitution) White - 71.6% Black - 24.7% Drug Abuse Violations White - 71% Black - 26.7% Gambling White - 45% Black - 48.4% Offenses against family and children White - 67.1% Black - 29.1% D.U.I. White - 82.2% Black - 13.6% Liquor Laws White - 79.2% Black - 14.5% Drunkenness White - 76.5% Black - 14.7% Disorderly Conduct White - 63.3% Black - 32.2% Vagrancy White - 66% Black - 30.7% All other offenses (except traffic) White - 69.2% Black - 27.4% Suspicion White - 35% Black - 30.7% American Indian or Alaka Native - 32.5% <- outlier Curfew and Loitering White - 56.3% Black - 40.7% Throughout the entire list, there's only one instance of whites (which if you remember is actually whites + hispanics) being arrested above their demographic percentage, and that's for D.U.I. Also there's not a single instance of blacks being arrested below their demographic percentage, of all things the closest one is D.U.I. I wonder how many people chalk this up to the meme of "institutional racism". The divergence in criminality becomes even larger when you understand the scope of how crime statistics don't readily make it available as to what % of the "White" offenders are Hispanic. Bureau of Justice Statistics gets into it circa 2015, however -> https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdf In 2014 "Sentenced prisoners under the jurisdiction of state of federal correctional authorities..." (2015 did not have complete data from Nevada and Oregon) White - 506,600 Black - 539,500 Hispanic - 326,400 In 2014 "Imprisonment rate of sentenced prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities..." per 100,000 U.S. Residents White - 317 Black - 1,824 Hispanic - 860 In 2015 the U.S. had a homicide rate of 4.88% per 100,000 people. Making us 126th in the world, according to Wikipedia. If you knock the homicide rate down to just the "White" portion it becomes 2.18 per 100,000. (2.18136) Which would make the U.S. 75th on Wikipedia. However, considering that there were ~46,000 white prison inmates serving time for murder in 2014 and ~43,700 hispanic prison inmates serving time for murder. Let's just be conservative and knock it down an additional 40%, that would make the U.S. homicide rate 1.3 per 100,000. That would make us 49th in the world, sat between Sweden with 1.15 and Israel with 1.36. (going next major country above and below, with 2015 statistics)
  2. 8.3k dmg in the 121 + made a new friend
  3. Object 430U is gonna come soon, and it's basically absurd. 122mm gun, compared to 121 and 113. 430U -> 2699 base dpm (9.78sec reload), 0.38 dispersion, 2.21sec aim time, 0.12/0.12/0.1 soft stats, -5/+? 121 -> 2750 base dpm (9.6sec reload), 0.35 dispersion, 2.7sec aim time, 0.14/0.14/0.12 soft stats, -5/+15 113 -> 2640 base dpm (10sec reload), 0.37 dispersion, 2.8sec aim time, 0.18/0.18/0.08 soft stats, -7/+18 Couple sources have the 430U's ammo selection as AP/APCR/HE but it's AP/HEAT/HE with the AP having 252mm pen, and HEAT having 340mm pen. Mobility vs 121 430U -> 14.29 hp/t, 0.575 soft, 0.671 medium, 1.534 hard 121 -> 14.87 hp/t, 0.7 soft, 0.8 medium, 1.6 soft But what makes the Obj 430U crazy is the Stationary Camo is 30.6% and Moving Camo is 22.9%. That and the armor, the 430U has 90mm sides + spaced armor over the sides, so basically full Russia. The UFP is side to side 160mm and highly sloped, basically enough to make the 113, IS-4, and E 75 cry. Also the turret is 300mm thick and has troll copulas, eat your heart out T62A.
  4. Mildly relevant study to the topic as of late.
  5. #5. Fake News Basically this one is a really dangerous situation to try and wrangle via state power. As I do believe quite strongly in free speech as well as free press. The very notion of 'the state' sort of deciding who is and who is not news, journalism, legitimate are all things to be avoided at all costs, basically. But I think it bears keeping in mind that the 'legitimate' fifth estate sort of brought this fake news revolution upon itself. Shilling out for big money, turning to 24/7 broadcasts that are constantly looking for a way to generate ad revenue and keep millions of people glued to the TV. I think some sort of transition away from advertising and news would probably be a good idea. I'm biased towards this however, comma space, as I think most forms of advertising are cancer and should be done away with. Marketing is probably moreso the root of all evil, than money itself, in a capitalistic society. I'll at least entertain that idea. I think legitimate news sites doing away with opinion pieces, grandstanding social and political issues by making value judgements on them, and sticking to objective factual reporting would be a step in the right direction. It's something Scott Adams has talked about at length, that Trump v. Media has sort of brought to the forefront the mainstream media's inability to simply report the news. They 'have to' make moral and ethical judgement on matters, because of how they've courted their audience. Likewise this panic coverage of things like healthcare risks, violence, and what have you; when we continue to live in a more and more peaceful world; disrupts and accurate view of the world. It's easy to cultivate a society of paranoid racists when all they see on the news or TV is blacks committing acts of violence. If you played nothing but episodes of Cops on syndicated TV, you would (and I don't think any economist or sociologist would disagree) see a rise in concern with regards to crime as well as anti-black racism. I've long argued that people on the whole are much more susceptible to non-factual argumentation and persuasion than the alternative. It furthermore ties to Trump, as he doesn't really engage in dialectic discussion, he's pure rhetoric. But so is the media, it's why they were so powerful for so long, but Trump has taken their weapons and used them to his own advantage. There has to be some larger effort to dismantle the power of rhetoric. It's no easy task, people are seemingly built to be indifferent to facts and logic, and vulnerable to emotional manipulation as well as your standard fair of confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, and other troubles with idiots. "Most people would rather die than think and many of them do!" - Bertrand Russel, The ABC of Relativity I will have to tap out on giving a legitimate answer for #5 as it's not something I've milled around in my head enough or long-enough to really grasp at some sort of real answer beyond what I've just given.
  6. #4. Mass Shootings AKA The Artist Formerly Known As Domestic Terrorism (specifically non-political events such as Sandy Hook, Vegas (?), Pulse, GA Tech, etc) Basically I don't think these are as problematic as people make them out to be. That's not to say we shouldn't be concerned, but from a strictly statistical analysis of the matter, Mass Shootings kill a tiny number of people. About eight times as many accidentally drown in swimming pools every year. Estimates put medical error as the cause of ~250k deaths a year. Mass shootings are ~400 total a year, and that's based on 2016 which is turning out to be a particularly bad year. There's certainly room to talk about legitimate gun law reform, but really the "Mass Shooting" or really "Mass Casualty" 'problem' is primarily a mental health one. We shouldn't dismiss cases of actual terrorism like the Boston Marathon Bombing, but I'm focusing on what I think is the crux. So far as making drastic changes to the law due to an annual handful of bizarre and horrific events, I'm not into that. SoD should be a country of dudes who continue to drink their beer and flip the bird while being shot at, if not slinging insults at their assailants. <- Ideally, but that is a bit of exaggeration. But I think any nationalized healthcare plan aka public option, should maybe not right now, but every few years look at the idea of mandating people see a psychologist once every couple years. And if they're considered in a high risk category, or something. Basically the whole idea would be to treat mental illness a lot more like we do physical illness. But that said, there's a lot of problems with how we do the latter as well. Focusing on preventative care, treating illnesses not symptoms, and not relying on lifelong medication as the primary treatment options; things of that nature, would be a benefit to all, IMO. That said, if someone proposes studying any of these matters, they should be funded responsibly. And should someone come up with a solution that shows real potential, it should be tried. Whether it's public safety practices, or mental health regulations.
  7. State of Danger rules, on #1. Trans kids To cut thru some diatribe, here's the deal. Pretty much all kids grow out of these "feelings" by puberty, not even by the end of puberty, just by the time they hit puberty. SoD will not allow any medical treatments for minors. No hormones, no hormone blockers, no surgeries; until you're an adult. So far as people's obligation to identify you as you choose to identify, you can go fuck your horse. You're not entitled to not having your feelings hurt. That said, malicious targeting of individuals requires no special legal treatment as malicious targeting is always a crime to begin with. Should little Suzy want to be called Mitch in school, it's sort of one of those things that has to be social contract. If the kids/teacher are like, ya cool, whatev. If not, oh well. Life and reality do not bend to the dictates of your fancies and wims, if you can't handle it, SoD doesn't need or want you. I would also invest state resources into legitimate psychological, psychiatric, clinical, and neuroscientific studies on the matter. As much as it is fin foil red light alarm bells, there probably is some argument to the idea of xenoestrogens and phytoestrogens in processed foods and products having a role to play, stuff like BPA and soy. But I'd gamble cultural/societal influences are far greater. The end game being what is functionally the greatest pathway to human happiness and fulfillment. Perhaps, to me at least, the most obvious factor that condemns the idea of gender transition as therapy is the zero impact it has on mental health outcomes. Post op and pre op transsexuals have the same rates of suicide/attempted suicide, depression, co-morbidity with other serious mental problems, etc.. etc.. It also runs into a different topic all together, which is basically the "degenerate" lifestyle of the LGBT community. Promiscuous sexual practices taken to the extreme (hundreds and or thousands of partners, large portion of whom are strangers), high rates of mental illness and instability, high rates of STD infection, etc.. etc.. You can't just pretend a group of people is "perfectly normal" when they have such negative statistical correlations that are orders of magnitude higher than the 'general populace'. Basically, you're free to do as you please as an adult. Kids are not allowed to take drugs or undergo surgery to groom them for gender or sex transition. Pending studies looking further into the matters of both childhood and adult trans-identity stuff. Probably a special emphasis looking at the potential harm in parents 'grooming' their children to meet a specific standard. Namely both the notion of parents who say smack their son around for not being 'manly' but also parents who would face their daughter to participate in typically male activities in some weird fucked up home that she becomes transgendered. I think LS and I both agree, kids as much as possible, should be left the fuck alone; with regards to the very existentially dreadful shortcomings of most human adults. #2. Abortion I think Freakenomics is the best case for abortion, period. But I also highly empathize and understand, or so I hope, the arguments against it's allowance in society. You simply cannot rule out the positive impacts of basically reducing unwanted children from a society. It's quite terrible to think about, especially when you consider the numbers. SoD will allow legal abortions, pretty much without any caveats under certain conditions, including but not limited to cases of.. -rape -incest -underage -medical necessity -birth defects of a serious nature First three are somewhat obvious. I think it should go either way in the first instance. Should a man rape a woman, the woman can choose to abort the child. Likewise, should a woman rape a man, the man should be able to decide if wants to be a father or not (biological or otherwise). In the case of incest it should be the woman's decision. If either/both party is underage also allowable; obviously statutory rape charges and all that would have to be involved. However, comma space, I think putting up legal requirements for abortion clinics to report things to the police in any but the most egregious cases should be really deeply considered. I do not say women who were raped, not seeking an abortion, because they still live in fear of their rapist; that sort of thing. However, comma space, the push should be to eliminate that concern as a larger socio-cultural development. I would also like to be able to say the SoD conducts a "war on abortion" but on the demand side, not the supply side. By seeking to educate men and women, primarily about human health and anatomy, but also safe sex practices. I don't know what the best way to do that is, but I know we're not making much of an effort now, and we might want to in hopes of improving society. But basically I'd like to live in a society where abortions are legal, but generally speaking not gotten except for sorts of cases listed above. The last two can get a little tricky. Medical necessity is basically a medical judgement in which a doctor says "you carry this baby to term, you have an X% chance of dying and/or the baby dying". I think cases in which the pregnancy has a dubious likelihood of success, abortion is an allowable practice. The birth defects of a serious nature, should basically be stuff that really prevents a child becoming a productive adult. But I will also indulge in my bias towards passive eugenics, and probably allow a fair bit more under this umbrella myself then most people would like. I'd be cool with aborting kids for things like down syndrome, but not oligodactyly. Furthermore, as much as possible abortions should be done in a timely manner. Ideally all abortions take place as soon as possible. I will go ahead and put an axe on the idea of late-term abortion for any reason not listed above. If it's not one of the above listed reasons, let's call them elective abortions. Elective abortions must take place in the first X-months of pregnancy, as I'm not an expert I'm not going to stamp a firm number in there. But conservatively, I'd easily say it has to be before the 6th month, probably earlier. Again, this emphasizes the importance of education, so women recognize the signs of pregnancy vs realizing 8 months down the road they're pregnant. When it comes to elective abortions, I will throw in a couple more caveats. I think people with serious criminal convictions, or are getting repeat abortions; should be passively taken out of the reproductive game. I don't mean forced hysterectomies, but probably making them get their tubes tied would be a good idea. And if they want to have them untied, they can pay for it themselves. Someone who is wishing to have children, who can't afford that (in my hypothetical society, as it wouldn't be covered in SoD's national healthcare plan, for obvious reasons) has no business having children. I also think similar actions could be done with male criminals, to be entirely frank. But I entertain no idea of permanent alteration to a person's person, without concrete evidence. Which, oddly enough, will be covered in another topic. #3. Crime and Punishment I'm going to be somewhat terse with this one, as it's otherwise a very broad subject. But to hit the important points, I don't believe in the utility of incarceration for the most part. I'm a fan of Malcom Gladwell's talk on the "Three C's" (Above). I definitely think any crime that could be considered non-violent or victimless shouldn't be punished with incarceration. I also believe there's sort of two (or maybe more) tiers to evidence that result in conviction. A - Eye witness testimony, circumstantial evidence B - Video clearly showing the criminal act in progress With evidence from exhibit A, I would never condone permanent solutions such as capital punishment. But under B, I would be open to their consideration. So if you were convicted of murder, you'd at worse get life in prison. Unless we found like video of you actually killing people, then we'd execute you. This is a really idealized concept, and I have no actual idea of how functional it would be in the magical world of legal language. But it's basically what I'd want, without concrete evidence of a crime, all considerations for punishment have to be kept within the realm of things we'd want to allow the state to do to people, without said concrete evidence. Because eye witness testimony is basically shit, and so is circumstantial evidence when you have it being pushed by professionals in the profession of convicting people for crimes; and further masterminded by DA's who's job it is to get those convictions to stick. Let 1,000 guilty men go before imprisoning 1 innocent, sort of notion. But I also think a lot of things we consider laws suitable to punishment when people violate them are retarded. I don't believe in the necessity of state vehicle registrations, at least when they are of cost to the private citizen. If you're worried about emissions and stuff, try to do things in the opposite way. Keep your vehicle tested and up to date, get a tax break. Not a, pay us money on an annual basis or we'll slap you with a ticket should we catch you at whatever abysmal rate that happens to be, see video above. More serious crimes, incarceration is probably an option, but certainly not as it's done in the United States. I think the notion of letting various models operating to try and find a better solution, is a good one. Looking internationally to countries with low recidivism rates, and low crime rates would probably be a decent start. But let's also not be stupid, there's no fucking way Norwegian prison would work for society's purposes with members of MS-13. But locking up people for an ounce of pot is basically shooting yourself in the dick. And that accounts for a LARGE number/percentage of federal inmates. State's prisons tend to be filled with actually violent offenders, which are another matter to address. Basically, spend some money in an intelligent fashion. Find some keen minds and motivated individuals to work on the problem, how do we reform criminals and/or sort out ones that will not be reformed. Furthermore the largest factors for crime are two fold, urbanized population density and poverty. While we can only do so much about that first one, we certainly can make attempts to deal with the later. We shouldn't be surprised that areas without meaningful and legitimate work, high birth rates, and pretty fucked up standards of living; have massive crime problems. Legalizing drugs and eliminating them as a stream of income to finance organized crime and violence, probably wouldn't hurt either. And if nothing else, you can put some people to work who have expertise with drugs, selling them.
  8. Yeah well, millions of dead unborn since 1973 don't lie neither. It's something hilarious to bring up with virtue signal cucks, because ACTUAL white supremacists and such support abortion rights as it categorically impacts black replacement rate more than it does the white replacement rate.
  9. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger >Misattributed We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members. Misquoted by Diane S. Dew (2001) Omits words from a letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble Sanger proposing the "Negro Project", where Sanger wrote: "And we do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." The quote was similarly misused in "Women, Race, & Class" (12 February 1983) by Angela Davis, where it is implied that that Sanger was organizing an extermination campaign and the minister would be the main propaganda milling machine. So what she said was -> "And we do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." And that's supposed to nullify the misattributed quote's meaning? :thinking emoji:
  • Create New...